CAT 2023 Slot 3 — VARC Question 5
The passage below is accompanied by four questions. Based on the passage, choose the best answer for each question.
âââââââSteven Pinker’s new book, “Rationality: What It Is, Why It Seems Scarce, Why It Matters,” offers a pragmatic dose of measured optimism, presenting rationality as a fragile but achievable ideal in personal and civic life. . . . Pinker’s ambition to illuminate such a crucial topic offers the welcome prospect of a return to sanity. . . . It’s no small achievement to make formal logic, game theory, statistics and Bayesian reasoning delightful topics full of charm and relevance.
It’s also plausible to believe that a wider application of the rational tools he analyzes would improve the world in important ways. His primer on statistics and scientific uncertainty is particularly timely and should be required reading before consuming any news about the [COVID] pandemic. More broadly, he argues that less media coverage of shocking but vanishingly rare events, from shark attacks to adverse vaccine reactions, would help prevent dangerous overreactions, fatalism and the diversion of finite resources away from solvable but less-dramatic issues, like malnutrition in the developing world.
It’s a reasonable critique, and Pinker is not the first to make it. But analyzing the political economy of journalism — its funding structures, ownership concentration and increasing reliance on social media shares — would have given a fuller picture of why so much coverage is so misguided and what we might do about it.
Pinker’s main focus is the sort of conscious, sequential reasoning that can track the steps in a geometric proof or an argument in formal logic. Skill in this domain maps directly onto the navigation of many real-world problems, and Pinker shows how greater mastery of the tools of rationality can improve decision-making in medical, legal, financial and many other contexts in which we must act on uncertain and shifting information. . . .
Despite the undeniable power of the sort of rationality he describes, many of the deepest insights in the history of science, math, music and art strike their originators in moments of epiphany. From the 19th-century chemist Friedrich August Kekulé’s discovery of the structure of benzene to any of Mozart’s symphonies, much extraordinary human achievement is not a product of conscious, sequential reasoning. Even Plato’s Socrates — who anticipated many of Pinker’s points by nearly 2,500 years, showing the virtue of knowing what you do not know and examining all premises in arguments, not simply trusting speakers’ authority or charisma — attributed many of his most profound insights to dreams and visions. Conscious reasoning is helpful in sorting the wheat from the chaff, but it would be interesting to consider the hidden aquifers that make much of the grain grow in the first place.
The role of moral and ethical education in promoting rational behavior is also underexplored. Pinker recognizes that rationality “is not just a cognitive virtue but a moral one.” But this profoundly important point, one subtly explored by ancient Greek philosophers like Plato and Aristotle, doesn’t really get developed. This is a shame, since possessing the right sort of moral character is arguably a precondition for using rationality in beneficial ways.
The author endorses Pinker’s views on the importance of logical reasoning as it:
Answer & solution
equips people with the ability to tackle challenging practical problems.
- B
focuses public attention on real issues like development rather than sensational events.
- C
provides a moral compass for resolving important ethical dilemmas.
- D
helps people to gain expertise in statistics and other scientific disciplines.
Easy
The question asks why the author endorses Pinker's view that logical reasoning matters. The key line is in paragraph 4: skill in conscious, sequential reasoning "maps directly onto the navigation of many real-world problems" and improves "decision-making in medical, legal, financial and many other contexts." We want the option that captures this practical problem-solving payoff.
"Equips people with the ability to tackle challenging practical problems." This directly restates the author's endorsement — reasoning "maps directly onto the navigation of many real-world problems" and aids decisions in medical, legal and financial contexts. Correct.
Refocusing public attention away from sensational events (shark attacks, rare vaccine reactions) is a point about media coverage, which the author calls "a reasonable critique" but says Pinker is "not the first to make" — it is not the basis on which the author endorses reasoning's importance. Too narrow / wrong basis.
The moral/ethical dimension is something the author says Pinker leaves "underexplored" and which "doesn't really get developed." It is a gap the author flags, not the reason he endorses logical reasoning. Contradicts the passage.
Gaining expertise in statistics is just one tool Pinker covers; the author praises the primer on statistics but the endorsement is about applying reasoning broadly to real-world decisions, not acquiring a discipline for its own sake. Too narrow.
Option A — the author backs Pinker because mastery of rationality equips people to tackle challenging practical, real-world problems.